PLAN AND EVALUATE NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

THREE CAREER EPISODES
2. ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS SYSTEM TO PLAN AND EVALUATE
NATURAL RESOURCESS MANAGEMENT IN COLOMBIA
2.1 INTRODUCTION
CE 2.1 This project was made by the Environmental Policy Office, EPO, at the National
Planning Department of Colombia, DNP, in cooperation with the UNEP (United
Nations Environmental Program) and the CIAT (International Center of Tropical
Agriculture), from 1996 to 1998. The purpose was to identify main environmental
problems of the country as well as socioeconomic pressures over natural resources, in order
to assess Policies, Plans and Programs, PPP, bearing in mind the framework of sustainable
development.
CE 2.2. Environmental Indicators then, where formulated for the first time at a National
Level, working together with the Ministry of the Environment, MMA, the IGAC
(Geographical National Institute) and the DANE (Statistical National Institute).
CE 2.3. I worked as a consultant of the EPO for the topics of Urban Industrial Areas,
Infrastructure, Mining and Energy sectors: demand of Natural Resources done by these
sectors, as wells as impacts over the environment and population.
2.2 BACKGROUND
CE 2.4 The decisions making process for planning Environmental Resources Management
starts from the identification of key resources to manage (e.g. water and land use) as well
as significant environmental impacts caused by development processes such as mine
exploitation, urban activities, industrial processes, among others. Once Land Use and
water conditions (both availability and quality), are assessed and critical areas or resources
identified, the definition of PPP can be done.

CE-2 2
CE 2.5. Having PPP, objectives and goals are set in function of priorities, pressures,
technical and political needs. Actions and strategies must be established then throughout
the regions and at local levels. Next, monitoring the efficiency management in the
compliment and execution of Programs and projects, as well as the impact on the economic,
social, and environmental components needs to be done by using indicators. More over,
indicators are needed to set objectives and goals in a reasonable way.
Figure 1. The Decisions Making Process
CE 2.6. To carry out the process (Figure 1), is necessary the production of information that
allows to measure the success in getting the objectives, goals, actions and strategies taken.
The decisions making process as well as the development process, are dynamic, which
imply the necessity of elaborating tools which permit analysis and monitoring at different
levels and scales. Thus, these processes are carried out at different levels of decision
making in the country, administrative and/or ecological (eg. Territories, Basins, etc.) and
imply environmental, political, institutional, economic, social, and cultural considerations.
Therefore, when the projects and actions are applied and executed, should be taken into
SEA, EIA Assessments
and Diagnostic
Formulation of Policy,
Plans and Programs:
Setting Objectives and
Goals
Identification of Problems
Establishment of Actions and
Strategies
Monitoring and
Measurement
QA/QC
Evaluation of PPP, and
Performance of the
National & Regional
Environmental
Management System

CE-2 3
account the different scales (national, regional and local) since imply different impacts in
the space and the time.
CE 2.7. The cycle shown in Figure 1 is not quite different to the one known as the Deming
Cycle, or Continual Improvement Scheme, stated by the ISO 14001 International Standard
for an Environmental Management System1. For the decisions making process, the
analysis and monitoring of the politics and strategies of development, exist a series of
economic and social statistical data, at national, regional and local levels, that is usually
used (UNEP 1993, UNDP 1994; World Bank 1995; WRI 1996). Nevertheless, equivalent
environmental information does not exist, is not found available for the users, or needs to
be built, as it was the Colombian case, and the reason of the Project.
CE 2.8 As a Chemical Engineer I made notice to EPO-DNP, that the problem of
production and availability of information to support decisions making increases when we
want to monitor the interactions and relations among components such as environmental
risks and public health implications, eco-efficiency and clean production, life cycle
assessment of products manufactured in Colombia and interactions with International
Green Markets, among others, as shown in figure 2 in the following page.
CE 2.9. Inside this context, the Geographical Information Systems, GIS, are useful tools to
incorporate environmental information inside the decisions taking and planning process.
The environmental, economic, and social integration of indicators inside a spatial context,
permits powerful and more real analysis of the ones that offer the conventional methods
(tabulated data, time series, etc.)
1
International Standard Organization, “ISO 14001: Requirements for an Environmental Management
System”, TC 198, SC-1, London, 1996.

CE-2 4
Figure 2. HSEQ Interactions at a National Level
CE 2.10. The application and integration of these tools (Indicators and GIS) improved the
application of the National Framework, which was built upon a modification of the OECD
model, known such as Pressure – State – Response, to built the environmental indicators2
,
Figure 3.
Figure 3. The P-S-R Framework
CE 2.11. The P-S-R model is a simple framework which allows to organize the information
in a causal progression of the human actions that produce a pressure on the natural
resources, and that at the same time involve a change in the state of the environment. Then,
the Governmental Organizations responds with measures or actions, to reduce or prevent
significant environmental impacts.
2
OECD; OECD Core Set of Indicators for Environmental Performance Reviews, Environmental
Monograph # 83, OCDE, Paris, 1993.
ENVIRONMENTAL
RISK
PUBLIC
HEALTH
ECO EFFICIENCY
Sustainable
Development
sarrollo
Sostenible
PRESSURE STATE RESPONSE

CE-2 5
2.3 PERSONAL WORKPLACE ACTIVITY
CE 2.12. With the CIAT at DNP we added two categories to the model. The one of
Impact, and the one of Management. This, due to I considered that one thing is the State of
the environment, for instance a polluted river with an excessive concentration of heavy
metals, and another, the impact that it may cause upon the fisheries, as well as the human
health. The category of Management was introduced to measure efficiency of the National
Environmental System Entities (SINA) on the head of the MMA in implementing
response, such as PPP, at a National, Regional and local levels (See, Figure A-1,
Organizational Diagram of SIPSA Project, in Appendix 1).
Figure 4. The P-S-I-R-M Framework
As there was a Chemical Engineer in the consultant team, last model looked like the
one shown in Figure 4.
CE 2.13. My experience in Simulation models and as a Process Engineer made me think
the importance of “recycling streams”. In real terms what the recycling stream inside this
model means, is that natural resources management must focus on the pressures that
population and economic activities do over natural resources3
. This pressures and sometime
unsustainable uses deteriorates ecosystems quality (State category of the model). Polluted
ecosystems, causes impacts over biodiversity and human health (Impact category).
3
For instance, if we want to control urban atmospheric pollution we might measure the concentration of
pollutants in the air, but the action we really have to do is to identify and reduce some emissions sources,
considered as pressures, in de model. The same may happens with a turbid river: we can measure the
Suspended Solids, and then for instance realize that the increment of this indicator is caused by an erosion
process. But we don’t know if this is due to a deforestation activity done upstream by a farmer, or due to a
land use change e.g., mining exploitation (both of them pressures over the environment) Taken from
PESCADOR, Alvaro, “Toward a System to Monitor Natural Resources and its Management in Colombia”,
Magazine of Environment and Development, Vol. 7, p. 147-170, University Javeriana, Bogotá, CEJA, 1997,
See Appendix 2.).
IMPACTSTATE RESPONSE MANAGEMENT
E
PRESURE

CE-2 6
CE 2.14. So, SINA might focus over the driving forces or pressures: must effective way of
dealing with pollution is avoiding it, or reducing it at the source through the use of
technology, application of economic instruments, financial incentives, and enforcement by
law (e.g. setting up emissions allowed).
CE 2.15. Besides influencing the structure, interpretation and application of the Model to
build Environmental Indicators in Colombia, as shown in Figure 4, (see published paper in
Appendix 2), I formulated the Indicators for Themes and Variables Boldfaced on
Table 1. Developed in the Matrix at following page, on Table 2.
CE 2.16. Table 1. Variables under my Responsibility at SIPSA4 Project are boldfaced
THEME VARIABLES
SOCIAL DYNAMIC
Population
Employment
Education
Health
Quality of Life
ECONOMIC DYNAMIC
Production
Finances
LANDSCAPE AND
LAND USE
Land Uses
Infrastructure
Human Settles in Risk
Areas
BIODIVERSITY
Ecosystems
Biological Resources
AGRICULTURE
SYSTEMS
Agriculture
Cattle
Forest
Fisheries and Sea
catchments
MINNING AND
ENERGY
Mining
Production and Use of
Energy
Transport
URBAN INDUSTRIAL
SETTLEMENTS
Atmosphere
Solid Wastes
WATER
Basin Management
Use and Quality
4 Boldfaced Variables concerned to the Quality Unit inside the EPO (Environmental Policy Office at DNP). In
the contract at Appendix 1, appears just as “Quality Indicators”.

CE-2 7
CE 2.17. Table 2. Matrix of the Planning and Monitoring Environmental Indicators System
THEME VARIABLES PRESSURE STATE IMPACT RESPONSE MANAGEMENT
Infrastructure *Accessibility (hours)
*Capacity of
infrastructure
*Ecosystem
fragmentation
*Investment/year
*EIA run over major
Projects.
*No of natural
disasters / year
* Population exposed to
disasters
*Population affected by
disasters / year
* Investment in
Prevention Projects (
$/year)
*Area stabilized / Total
Risk Area
*No of accidents with
hazardous substances /
year
*Area affected by
disasters (Ha / year)
* Investment in
Contingency Plans
($/year)
*Population resettled /
Total Exposed
*Economic lost due to
natural disasters
($/year)
*Human lost (hab /
year)
*Extraction of
Minerals (Ton/year)
*Mining exploitation
(No, size, kind)
% Reduction of
Reserves: (Used /
Proven) x 100
* Investment in
monitoring
Environmental
Management Plan ( $/
year)
*Legal Licenses given for
mining exploitation / Total
*Consumption of
Minerals / hab-year
*Production, Processing
and Hydrocarbons
Transport
* Area eroded by
mining extraction (Ha)
* Area monitored along a
year /Total
*Power Generation
(Total and as % of the
Installed Capacity,
GW)
* % of Energy generated
by: Hydroelectricity
* Inundated Area, (Ha /
Kw generated) in
Hydroelectric
% Wind Energy / Total
* Transfers of the
Hydroelectric sector to
basin protection ($ / GW
Generated-Year)
* Energetic
Consumption by
sector (%)
* % of Energy generated
by: coal, natural gas
% Solar Energy /Total
* Energy demand
hab(Kw/hab-year)
*Vehicles per
capita (No/hab)
*Distribution of the
automotive park
* Average Speed in
big cities
*Passengers using
public transport (
#/day)
*Monitoring vehicular
emissions certificates
(# / total)
*Consumption of
Nafta, Diesel, and
Natural gas / year
*Investment in
massive transport ($
/ year)
Mining
Transport
MINNING AND
ENERGY
LANDSCAPE &
LAND USE
Production and
Energy Use
Human Settles in
Risk Areas

CE-2 8
THEME VARIABLES PRESSURE STATE IMPACT RESPONSE MANAGEMENT
*Emissions of
GHG (Gg equiv
CO2)
*Concentration of
conventional
atmospheric
contaminants (ppm)
*Morbidity rate (#
cases / 10,000 hab)
* International
Agreements ratified
(#, Kind)
*Implementation of
Economic Instruments
* Emissions of
NOx, SOx,
(Ton/year)
*UV Index
*Potential
population
contracting Malaria
due to global
warming
* Investment in
Pollution control ($ /
year)
* Compliance Plans
for emission control
* Emissions of
CFC(Ton/year)
* Noise sources
*Noise levels (dB)
* Population exposed
to noise ( (# cases /
10,000 hab)
*Monitoring net for
cities over 500,000
habitants
*Waste
Generation
(Kg/hab-day)
*# of landfills
(capacity, Ton / day,
useful life)
*Population
exposed to wastes
(No.) *Polluted
land by wastes (Ha)
* Plans for Integrated
Waste Disposal (#
cities implanted
/Total)
*(Waste technically
Disposed/Generated)
*Hazardous
wastes (Ton/day)
* Incineration
(Ton/day)
*Recycling of
materials / Total
generated
*Demand of water
by Sector, %
* A Index for
drinking water
* Morbidity rate by
Diarrhea (# cases /
10,000 hab)
*Spent Waters
Treatment Plants
Invesment ($ / year)
(% of Water Treated
/Total Spent)
*Demand of water
(M
3
/hab-day)
* B Index for
drinking water
* Infant Mortality
rate (# cases /
10,000 children)
* Plans to attend
vulnerability for
water availability
* Pollution Taxes over
DBO5, DQO and SST.
*Spent waters
(M 3/day)
*Pop. with access
to drink water, %
*DBO5(mg/l)
* Investment in
IDEAM monitoring
Net ($/year)
* DBO5 (Ton/day) *DBQ (mg/l)
* DBQ (Ton/day) * SST (mg/l)
* SST (Ton/day)
Use and QualityWATER
URBAN
INDUSTRIAL
SETTLEMENTS
Atmosphere
Solid Wastes

CE-2 9
CE 2.18. On the other hand, I also developed the Methodological Sheets, known today in
the international literature as Meta Data, for each one of the formulated indicators on Table
2. In order to build the Methodological Sheets, as a primary source I worked under the
frame work of international protocols, The Convention on Climate Change of United
Nations, The Montreal Protocol, the Agenda XXI, and the OECD core of indicators. See
bibliography at the end of each Methodological Sheet. As a main criteria to build the
Indicators I used the suggested by EPA (Environmental Protection Agency, USA), shown
on Table 3.
Table 3. Main Criteria when selecting a core of Environmental
Indicators (EPA,1995; Rump,1995)
DATA Accuracy Relation with the problems Utility for the USERS
Scientific Support
Measurement Techniques
Representatively
Convenience of the Scales
Applicability
Not Redundancy
Availability Geographic area involved Compressibility and
Interpretability
Quality Sensitivity to the changing
conditions
Value of Reference
Cost-effective development Specificity Retrospective-Predictive
Statistics Series
Accessibility
Connectivity Comparability
Opportunity
CE 2.19. As an example of my job as a Chemical Engineer, I have translated three
methodological Sheets, one in the theme of Mining and Energy in Appendix 3, one in the
theme of Urban Industrial Settlements in Appendix 4, and one in the theme of Water, as
appears in Appendix 5.
CE 2.20. Main difficulties found along the project were Institutional Coordination for
sharing the information, lacks of information, and differences in methodology building or
the units used to measure indicators, among others. Sometimes, to cope with an indicator

CE-2 10
that could accomplish the criteria on Table 3, for a variable and model category was so hard
to do it. In some other cases, aggregated indicators were found to be transversal to different
themes.
CE 2.21. For instance, Emissions of GHG which appears at the Theme of Urban Industrial
Settlements in the Variable of Atmosphere, is related with the themes of Agriculture,
Mining and Energy, and Land Use Changes. The important issue was to identify the
contribution of each Variable (Transport, plus Production and Energy Use, in the case of
Mining an Energy), and then, to have the information available in some place: In this case
at the Variable of Atmosphere, although as explained, GHG emissions are not done by
Human Settlements only.
2.4 SUMMARY
CE 2.22. In function of the quality and availability of the data, SIPSA supplied planners
with a cost effective tool, allowing to work and to use the information at the necessary
scales, in order to assess in the more accurate way the decisions making cycle done at DNP,
toward the desirable sustainability of Colombian development process.
CE 2.23. GIS and Environmental Indicators together allowed to make analysis not
performed before for Natural Resources Management in Colombia. On the other hand, by
crossing maps with indicators and doing overlays we could identify potential conflict for
land use, as the one shown on Map 2 and 3 in Appendix 6, Using SIPSA. When I make an
overlay with the Protected Territory over Map 1, in Map 2, I can identify a potential
conflict due to oil reservoirs under Protected Territory at a National Natural Park, as shown
with a zoom in Map 3.
CE 2.24. Indeed the Conflict happened in 1997, while we were building SIPSA, due to an
Environmental License granted by the MMA to Oil Companies for exploration of Oil over
a geological zone known as the Samoré Block, inside the Cobarria Reserve, where UWA

CE-2 11
Indigenous people live, and were not consulted5
. This case went up to the Inter American
Commission of Human Rights.
CE 2.25. DNP got the tool to analyze and foreseen potential conflicts. I think most
interesting issue, SIPSA was the seed for what it is known today as the SIAC6
(Colombian
Environmental Information System), on behalf of the MMA and IDEAM (Environmental,
Atmospheric and Hydrological Studies Institute).
CE 2.26. On the other hand, an agreement of Clean Production was signed with the
Industries which manufactures cement, due to in the Urban-Industrial Corridor of
Sogamoso they were identified as the main fix emission source. Besides, they were
affecting human health because of the strong amount of particles in suspension with a dp <
10 microns.
5
AEO And UNIVERSITY OF HARVARD, “Observations and Recommendations About the Block Samoré
Case”, Washington, 1997.
6
MMA, IDEAM, AVH, INVEMAR, IIAP, SINCHI, Embassy of The Netherlands, “Environmental
Information System of Colombia”, 3 Vol. Vol. 1 Concepts, Definitions and Instruments of the
Environmental Information in Colombia. Vol. 2 First Generation Indicators and Base Line. Vol. 3
State Profile of the Natural Resources in Colombia, 2002.

CE-2 12
CE 2.27 ABREVIATIONS
AVH – Biodiversity Research Institute, Alexander Von Humboldt.
BPD - Barrels per Day
CFC – Chlorine Fluorine Carbons
CGR – General Republic Central Auditing, Colombia
CIAT – International Center of Tropical Agriculture
DANE – National Department of Statistics, Colombia
DNP – National Planning Department, Colombia
EIA – Environmental Impact Assessment
EPA – Environmental Protection Agency, USA
EPO – Environmental Policy Office at DNP
GHG – Green House Gases
GNP – Gross National Product
IGAC – National Geographical Institute, Agustin Codatzzi
INVEMAR – Marine Research Institute
KPCD - Kilo Cubic Feet per Day
KBPD - Kilo Barrels per Day
MBPD - Million of Barrels per Day
MMA – Ministry of Environment, Colombia
HSEQ – Health, Safety, Environment and Quality
IDEAM – Environmental, Atmospheric and Hydrological Studies Institute
ISO – International Standard Organization
IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change of United Nations
IIAP – Pacific Ecosystems Research Institute, Colombia
OECD – Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
P-E-R – Pressure, State, Response Model, OECD
PPP – Policies, Plans and Programs
QA/QC – Quality Assurance / Quality Control
SEA – Strategic Environmental Assessment
SINA – National Environmental System, Colombia
SIPSA - Sustainable Indicators for Planning and Support Actions.
SIAC – Sistema de Información Ambiental para Colombia.
TPD - Ton per Day
UNEP – United Nations Environmental Program
VOC – Volatile Organic Compounds
WRI – World Resources Institute

CE-2 13
BIBLIOGRAPHY
AEO And UNIVERSITY OF HARVARD, “Observations and Recommendations About the
Block Samoré Case”, Washington, 1997.
CHAPARRO RODRIGO, AND OTHERS, “Emissions to the Environment in Colombia”,
IDEAM, Bogotá, 1998
COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, “Indicators of Sustainable
Development, Framework and Methodologies”, UNEP, New York, 428 p.
DNP, Tables and Atlas of Infrastructure, Transport and Energy, Bogotá, UINF, 1996.
EPA, quoted by CGR, , “The State of the Natural Resources and the Environment”,
Bogotá, 1995, p. 69-72.
GONZALEZ FABIO AND OTHERS, “Preliminary Inventory of GHG in Colombia,
sources and catchers”, Colombian Association of Physics, Natural and Exact Sciences
Magazine, Vol. XXI, No 79, Bogotá, 1997.
INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ORGANIZATION, “ISO 14001: Requirements for an
Environmental Management System”, TC 198, SC-1, London, 1996.
MINISTRY OF HEALTH, Drinking Water Norm 2105, Bogotá, 1983.
MMA, IDEAM, AVH, INVEMAR, IIAP, SINCHI, Embassy of The Netherlands,
“Environmental Information System of Colombia”, Vol. 1 Concepts, Definitions and
Instruments of Environmental Information in Colombia. Vol. 2 First Indicators
Generation and Base Line. Vol. 3 Profile of the Natural Resources in Colombia, 2002.
OECD; OECD Core Set of Indicators for Environmental Performance Reviews,
Environmental Monograph # 83, OCDE, Paris, 1993.
PESCADOR, Alvaro, “Toward a System to Monitor Natural Resources and its
Management in Colombia”, Magazine of Environment and Development, Vol. 7, p.
147-170, University Javeriana, Bogotá, CEJA, 1997.
UNEP, WMO, OECD, 1995, “IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories”,
New York, 87 p.
WINOGRAD, Manuel, “Environmental Indicators for Latin American and the Caribbean:
Toward the Sustainability in Land Use”, IICA; GTZ; OEA; WRI, San Jose of Costa
Rica, 1995, 84 p.

CE-2 14
APPENDIX 1 – National Environmental System of Colombia and
Organizations Involved in the SIPSA Development

CE-2 16
NATIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
SYSTEM - SINA
NATIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
SYSTEM - SINA
Figure A-1 Organizational Diagram of the SIPSA ProjectFigure A-1 Organizational Diagram of the SIPSA Project
DNP
MMA
REGIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
CORPORATIONS
URBAN and LOCAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
UNITS
OTHER
MINISTRIES
NATIONAL NATURAL
PARKS UNIT
RESEARCH INSTITUES
AVH – Biodiversity
IDEAM – Information
INVEMAR-Marine Ecosystems
SINCHI – Amazonian Research
IIAP- Pacific Studies
EPO
DANE
PRESIDENCY
OTHER
UNITS
AT DNP
IGAC
CIAT &
Consultant
Team
Conventions
My role was to Assess EPO at DNP in the Topics Of built environment, and
to develop environmental quality Indicators for the Mining, Energy and
Infrastructure sectors, known at the EPO of DNP as “quality indicators”,
as appears in the contract attached, translated to the English.
DNP
MMA
REGIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
CORPORATIONS
URBAN and LOCAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
UNITS
OTHER
MINISTRIES
NATIONAL NATURAL
PARKS UNIT
RESEARCH INSTITUES
EPO
DANE
PRESIDENCY
OTHER
UNITS
AT DNP
IGAC
CIAT &
Consultant
Team
Conventions
NATIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
SYSTEM - SINA
NATIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
SYSTEM - SINA
Figure A-1 Organizational Diagram of the SIPSA ProjectFigure A-1 Organizational Diagram of the SIPSA Project
DNP
MMA
REGIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
CORPORATIONS
URBAN and LOCAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
UNITS
OTHER
MINISTRIES
NATIONAL NATURAL
PARKS UNIT
RESEARCH INSTITUES
EPO
DANE
PRESIDENCY
OTHER
UNITS
AT DNP
IGAC
CIAT &
Consultant
Team
Conventions
My role was to Assess EPO at DNP in the Topics Of built environment, and
to develop environmental quality Indicators for the Mining, Energy and
Infrastructure sectors, known at the EPO of DNP as “quality indicators”,
as appears in the contract attached, translated to the English.
DNP
MMA
REGIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
CORPORATIONS
URBAN and LOCAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
UNITS
OTHER
MINISTRIES
NATIONAL NATURAL
PARKS UNIT
RESEARCH INSTITUES
EPO
DANE
PRESIDENCY
OTHER
UNITS
AT DNP
IGAC
CIAT &
Consultant
Team
Conventions

CE-2 17
APPENDIX 2 – Environmental Indicators Papers Written by the Author

CE-2 22
APPENDIX 3 – METHODOLOGICAL SHEET – Example 1
THEME: MINNING AND ENERGY
Production, Processing and Hydrocarbon Transport

CE-2 23
Theme Variable Pressure State Impact Response Management
Mining
and
Energy
Mining Production,
Processing and
Hydrocarbon
Transport
Name: Production, Processing and Hydrocarbon Transport
Descriptor: Production and Transport of Natural Gas by Reservoir
Production, Transport and Oil Processing
Units: Oil: Production in BPD
Processing in BPD
Transport through pipes in KBPD
Natural Gas: Production in KPCD
Transport through pipes in KPCD
Coal: TPD
Abbreviations: BPD: Barrels per Day
KBPD: Kilo Barrels per Day
MBPD: Million of Barrels per Day
KPCD: Kilo Cubic Feet per Day
TPD: Ton per Day
Geographical
Denominator: Basic: Town
Aggregated: Department
Other: By hydrocarbon’s reservoirs
Oil, Gas and Poly pipes Net
Definition and
Concepts: These indicators are part of the Fossil Fuels required by the country for
industrial, trade and transport activities. It is important to set the concept of
sustainability in the medium term to manage strategic energetic resources
such as hydrocarbons. Being Not Renewable Natural Resources there must
be a continual balance between extraction and proven reservoirs and thus
between exploration and production activities.

CE-2 24
Measurement: Production. For each Gas, Oil or associated camps, the name, oil basin,
kind of contract, reserves and production. For Coal mines the reservoirs
are geo referenced with its installed capacity and production.
Transport. Pipe diameter of oil, gas and processed hydrocarbons, length
between connected nodes, capacity MBPD or KPCD, and owner. For coal
the roots and transport means (by truck or train) destines and embark ports.
Storage. Raw Oil Storage Places, owner, name, capacity, kind and number
of Tanks.
Processing. In agreement with the capacity charge of raw oil by Refinery,
in BPD. LNG, GLP, Gasoline and Diesel Produced in BPD.
Interpretation: Production and Processing must be studied together with the Consumption
of Fuels in Colombia. Even tough the country produces and exports
Hydrocarbons, it does imports fuels such as Gasoline and Diesel, due to
Refineries Capacity is not enough to cover the internal demand. It is a
matter of Policy to set a more favorable economical balance, by increasing
Refinery capacity, which may need some investment.
Limitations: Environmental Impact Assessment must be done following up the
Environmental License granted to each oil camp, oil or gas facility. There
are Clean Production agreements with ECOPETROL to mitigate
production and processing impacts. Nevertheless it has been estimated that
Colombia looses U$ 1.000.000.000 dollars per year7
due to gorilla’s
terrorism over pipes infrastructure has a strong impact over aquatic and
land ecosystems. Oil spills affects economic activities of fishers and land
farmers.
Alternative
Indicators: Exploitation Hydrocarbon Areas, Production and Reservoirs.
Hydrocarbons, Gas and Oil Transportation Pipes Net.
Importance: Hydrocarbon Pipe lines Geo referenced is useful due to many of them
cross trough sensible ecosystems. It also shows the access capacity and
fossil fuels energy distribution to municipalities and regions along the
country. Production and Processing indicators allows to know the state of
oil and gas reservoirs and coal exploitation, allowing to design Energy
Policies in a short, mean and long term.
7 DNP – UNEP, “Impacts of Oil Spills in Colombia”, Bogotá, 1992.

CE-2 25
Due to Hydrocarbons are a gorilla's target, geo referencing them is useful
in order to see possible impacts and direction that the spills will take
toward potential sensible ecosystems, by crossing with elevation maps,
protected areas and natural parks.
Relationship
with other
indicators: Exploitation of Hydrocarbons / Proven Reservoirs by Kind of HC.
Available
Information: ECOPETROL. ECOCARBON. INGEOMINAS. UPME, Ministry of
Mines and Energy, Bogotá. Mining, Energy, Infrastructure and
Communications Unit (UINF) at DNP, Colombia.
Bibliography: DNP, Consulting Table and Atlas of Infrastructure, Transport and Energy,
UINF, 1996.

CE-2 26
THEME: URBAN INDUSTRIAL SETTLEMENTS
Green House Gases Net Emissions

CE-2 27
Urban
Industrial
Settlements
Atmosphere Green House
Gases Net
Emissions
Name: Green Houses Gases Net Emissions.
Descriptor: Measurement of Green House Gases Emitted, inducing Global Warming.
Units: Equivalent Ton of CO2 / year.
Geographical
Denominator Basic: Georeferenced
Definition and
Concepts Green House Gases correspond to Dioxide and Monoxide of Carbon,
Methane, CFCs and Nitrogen Oxides8
. Although CFCs are known as
substances which induce depletion of the ozone layer, they also have a
strong Global Warming Potential capacity, with degradation horizons
between 20 and 100 years. On the other hand, Nitrogen Oxides causes acid
rains, are ozone layer deplezores and induce global warming: one molecule
of N2O has 320 times more power to catch heat, than a molecule of CO2.
Measurement Estimation of CO, CO2, CH4 and NOX emissions, is made upon fossil fuels
production and consumption (combustion of hydrocarbons), volatilization of
its vapors, industrial processes (cement manufacture, mainly), land use
changes such as deforestation and pasturing, inadequate agricultural
practices and waste disposal. On the other hand, CFCs has its source in the
refrigeration industry, rigid foam manufacturing and aerosol propellants,
mainly.
It is the duty of the MMA and a Policy question to standardize norms and
measurement methods for fix sources. Articles 110 to 113 of Atmospheric
Pollution Act 948 of 1995, specifies isokinetic test over discharge chimneys,
mass balance and emissions factors. The Norm 005 of 1996 rules the
parameters and measurement methods for mobile sources, either new
vehicles or used, with motors using gasoline or diesel as a fuel.
8
United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development, “Indicators of Sustainable Development,
Framework and Methodologies”, UNEP, New York, 428 p.

CE-2 28
The following parameters or relevant activities are internationally used to
build this indicator, bearing in mind the emissions of each kind of gas done
by the activities9
.
1. Energy (Generation and use)
2. Industrial Production (Cement Manufacturing)
3. Agriculture (Including Catering)
4. Land Use Change
5. Waste Disposal
As appears in the Matrix of the Planning and Monitoring Environmental
Indicators System, Table 2 of the main body, CFCs are built as separate
indicators. To avoid double counting, they won’t be measured here, but they
will be as separate indicators, bearing in mind its importance as Ozone
Layer depletion substances (controlled under Montreal Protocol).
The indicator is built for each direct GHG not controlled under the Montreal
Protocol, as recommended by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change of United Nations (IPCC). The Global Warming Potential, GWP,
is used then as a standardization factor to compute the emissions as
equivalents of CO2 for a degradation time of 100 years, as shown on Table
A4.110
.
Table A4.1 GWP Factors for Direct GHG
GAS GWP
Carbon Dioxide, CO2 1
Methane, CH4 24,5
Nitrous Oxide, N2O 320
Carbon Monoxide (CO), Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), and NOX, are
considered indirect GHG by the IPCC (Econormopoulus, 1993; UNEP,
1995). The IPCC has come to harmonize Data Comparability, proposing to
make an inventory taking 1990 as a base year. As an example, on how to
apply this methodological sheet, I built the indicator for 1990 at a National
level, bearing in mind the relevant activities (Winograd, 1995), as shown on
Table A4.2, and the information provided by the inventory done at the
Colombian Association of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences.
9
UNEP, WMO, OECD, 1995, “IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories”, New York, 87 p.
10
LASHOF and AHUJA, quoted by Winograd, Manuel, “Environmental Indicators for Latin American and
the Caribbean: Toward the Sustainability in Land Use”, IICA; GTZ; OEA; WRI, San Jose of Costa
Rica, 1995, 84 p.

CE-2 29
Table A4.2 Emissions of GHG by Activity, Gg, 1990
ACTIVITY / GAS CO2 CH4 N2O
Energy (Generation
and use)
52.383 198 1
Industrial Production 3.388
Agriculture 1.985 1407 0,2
Land Use Change 130.702 234 7.4
Waste Disposal 160 1.6
TOTAL 188.458 1.999 10,2
Source: Colombian Association of Physics, Natural and Exact
Sciences Magazine, Vol. XXI, No 79, Bogotá, 1997.
Having this primary source, I could built the indicator by using the GWP
factors form Table A4.1, as shown on Table A4.3
Table A4.3. Net Emissions of GHG in Gg Equiv. of CO2,
Colombia, 1990.
GAS CO2 CH4 N2O TOTAL
Emissions 188.458 1.999 10,2
GWP 1 24,5 320
Emissions
in Gg Eq. CO2
188.458 48.976 3264 240.698
Fig A4.1 Emissions Contribution by GHG as % of
CO2, Colombia, 1990
79%
20%
1%
CO2
CH4
N2O

CE-2 30
0
50.000
100.000
150.000
200.000
250.000
CO2 CH4 N2O TOTAL
Fig A4.2 Net Emissions in Gg Eq. CO2, Colombia, 1990
CO2
CH4
N2O
TOTAL
Importance This indicator measures human activities contribution to global warming.
Although there are natural GHG emissions, human contribution is
considered a climate change factor (IPCC, Second Assessment Report,
1995). It is also a world wide accepted instrument (Convention on Climate
Change, UNEP) to record driving forces which may have intergenerational
consequences.
The IPCC points that Earth’s mean temperature could increase 1 up to 3,5
°C around 2020, which means a bigger overheat than the one from 10.000
years ago. This would cause ecosystem changes, sea level increment
producing inundation of coastal areas due to poles melting, and snowy
mountains reduction.
Interpretation CO2 emissions depends upon energy generation and consumption,
production systems, industrial structure, transport systems, agriculture and
forest practices. CH4 or methane from agriculture and catering as well as
waste disposal.
The convention on Climate Change of United Nations ratified by 152
countries points at the article 4 that by 2000 CO2 emissions as well as the one
of direct and indirect GHG not controlled under Montreal Protocol, should
stay at the same level of the base line (1990).
Now, when I am translating this Methodological Sheet, I can say that this
could not be accomplish by most countries, but German results showed us
that it is possible and economic grow while reducing GHG emissions.

CE-2 31
The Colombian inventory of 2000 should be done using the same categories
(Energy, Industry, Agriculture, Land Use Change and Waste Disposal) in
order to observe changes by economic activity.
On the other hand it is necessary to be extremely cautious with emissions
standardization to Gg Equivalent of CO2, due to GWP factors may change as
the international community increases its knowledge about absorption and
degradation of the CO2 cycle, used as a reference substance (UNEP,
Montreal Protocol, 1994, p.13.20-13.30). So, for standardized analysis, it is
necessary to use the same GWP factors for all the statistical series.
Limitations CFCs and NOX causes global warming, but as they are controlled under the
Montreal protocol as Ozone Layer deplezores are not taking into account in
this indicator, as recommended by IPCC. This indicator is built upon direct
GHG emissions, while undirected GHG emissions (CO, VOCs, and
troposphere O3) are not being taking into account. First measures in
Colombia shows a contribution not mayor to 10%, for what would be Total,
both direct and undirected GHG emissions (IDEAM, 1998).
Alternative
Indicators Due to each substance causes different over heated levels, it is necessary to
develop simple or individual indicators for each kind of emission (as shown
in Figures A4.1 and A4.2) before aggregation in Gg of Equivalent CO2
emissions, as in this indicator (Green bar at Figure A4.2).
Relationship
with other
Indicators There are Global Warming synergism with other indicators such as CFC and
NOX emissions, which are also deplezores of the ozone layer. A better
compression to the possible damage caused to ecosystems, local and global
environment may be inferred by integrating analysis with state indicators
(concentration of conventional atmosphere contaminants in big cities) and
impact indicators (population exposed to contract Malaria due to global
warming).
It will be also useful to establish correlations between emission levels and
energy consumption from fossil fuels sources, GNP and GHG emissions per
capita, as well as land use changes (e.g. deforestation to establish illicit
cultivars, in Colombia).

CE-2 32
International
Conventions The convention on Climate Change of United Nations ratified by 152
countries points at the article 4 that by 2000 CO2 emissions as well as the one
of direct and indirect GHG not controlled under Montreal Protocol, should
stay at the same level of the base line (1990). The Kyoto Protocol ratified by
Colombia is an instrument that may contribute to the reduction of GHG at a
global scale. In order to become a real toll to reduce GHG it is required to
control 55% of World’s emissions.
Now, when I am translating this Methodological Sheet, I can say that this
was reached on February of 2005.
Available
Information Gonzalez Fabio and Others, “Preliminary Inventory of GHG in Colombia,
sources and catchers”, Colombian Association of Physics, Natural and
Exact Sciences Magazine, Vol. XXI, No 79, Bogotá, 1997.
Chaparro Rodrigo, and Others, “Emissions to the Environment in
Colombia”, IDEAM, Bogotá, 1998.
Bibliography
CHAPARRO RODRIGO, AND OTHERS, “Emissions to the Environment in Colombia”, IDEAM,
Bogotá, 1998.
GONZALEZ FABIO AND OTHERS, “Preliminary Inventory of GHG in Colombia, sources and
catchers”, Colombian Association of Physics, Natural and Exact Sciences Magazine, Vol. XXI,
No 79, Bogotá, 1997.
COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, “Indicators of Sustainable Development,
Framework and Methodologies”, UNEP, New York, 428 p.
UNEP, WMO, OECD, 1995, “IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories”, New
York, 87 p.
WINOGRAD, Manuel, “Environmental Indicators for Latin American and the Caribbean: Toward
the Sustainability in Land Use”, IICA; GTZ; OEA; WRI, San Jose of Costa Rica, 1995, 84 p.

CE-2 33
THEME: WATER: A and B Drinking Water Indexes

CE-2 34
WATER Use and
Quality
Index A
Index B
Name: A and B Drinking Water Indexes
Descriptor: Physicochemical and bacteriological drinkable water measurement
Units: Adimensional, from 1 to 5.
Geographical
Denominator It can be measured over any water body.
Definition and
Concepts Its importance lies in compiling a high aggregated information level used to
establish whether a water is drinkable or not. The A and B Indexes are
defined as a parametrical weight of the following indicators, used by the
Environmental Ministry to measure water quality in Colombia:
1. PHYSIC QUALITY
INDICATOR UNITS ADMISIBLE VALUE
True Color PCU < 15
Odor and Flower Absent
Turbidity NTU < 5
Total Solids mg / L < 500
Conductivity µsiemens < 500
Floating substances Absent
2. CHEMICAL QUALITY
SUBSTANCE UNITS ADMISIBLE VALUE
(mg/L of) (mg/L)
Aluminum Al+3
0,2
Antimony Sb 0,005
Arsenic As 0,05
Barium Ba 1
Boron B 0,3

CE-2 35
2. CHEMICAL QUALITY (Continuation)
(mg/L of) (mg/L)
Cadmium* Cd 0,005
Cyanide CN-
0,005
Chlorine Cl-
1
Cupper Cu 1
Chrome Cr+6
0,05
Phenols C6 H6 OH Absent
Oil Hydrocarbons 0,3
Total Iron Fe+3
0,3
Manganese Mn 0,1
Mercury* Hg 0,001
Molybdenum Mb 0,7
Nyquil Ni 0,02
Nitrites NO2 0,1
Nitrates NO3 46
Plate Ag+1
0,05
Lead* Pb 0,05
Insecticides 0,0001 to 0,01
Selenium Se 0,01
Active substances at
Methylene Blue ABS 0,05
Sulfates SO4
-2
250
Total Trihalo methane THMs 0,01
Zinc Zn 5
Total Alkalinity CaCO3 100
Total Acidity CaCO3 50
Residual Chlorine Cl-
0,3 < Cl-
< 10
Hydroxides CaCO3 0
Hydrogen Potential, pH Units 6,5 < pH < 9
* Highly toxic heavy metals (EU and EPA´S black list)
3. BACTERIOLOGICAL QUALITY
(mg/L of) (mg/L)
Total Coli forms CFU/100 ml 0*
E-Coli CFU/100 ml Negative*
*
Measured by the filtration membranes method.

CE-2 36
Measurement Each one of the parameters can be measured by using portable laboratory
equipments manufactured by MERCK, HACH, etc. which come with the
instructions to do the titulations. In some other cases as in heavy metals,
spectrophotometer or chromatographic techniques may be used. What ever
the method or equipment employed the results must be quantitative and
they can not exceed the Allowed range or Admissible Value.
Interpretation There are some indicators which have a major influence over drinking
water quality. One economic although not 100% secure way to establish
drinkable status of water, instead running all test over the physic, chemical
and bacteriological parameters, is by calculating the A and B Indexes of
Water Quality.
Index A
The A Index is obtained from the minimal parameters to establish drinking
water quality in the Norm 2105 of the Health Ministry (Colombia, 1983),
As shown on Table A5.1 and Figure A5.1:
TABLE A5.1. Parameters and Weight for Index A*
INDICATOR WEIGHT, %
Alkalinity 7,7
Residual Chlorine 13,8
Chlorine 3,1
E-Coli 23,0
Total Coli forms 16,9
Color 4,6
Total Hardness 3,1
Total Iron 3,1
pH 7,7
Sulfates 6,2
Total Solids 3,1
Turbidity 7,7
* Taken from CGR, “The State of the Natural Resources and the
Environment”, Bogotá, 1995, p.69.

CE-2 37
Fig. A5.1 Parameters Used to build Index A
for Drinking Watyer Quality
7,7%
13,8%
3,1%
23,0%
16,9%
4,6%
3,1%
3,1%
7,7%
6,2%
3,1%
7,7%
Alkalinity
Residual Chlorine
Chlorine
E-Coli
Total Coli forms
Color
Total Hardness
Total Iron
pH
Sulfates
Total Solids
Turbidity
The qualification for each of the Indicators goes from 0 to 5 and it is
shown on Table A5.2
TABLE A5.2. PARAMETERS SCORES FOR INDEX A AND B*
Parameter/ SCORE 5,0 4,5 4,0 3,0 0,0
Alkalinity 0-120 > 120
Residual Chlorine 0,1-1** > 1,0
Chlorine 0-250 > 250
E-Coli 0 > 0
Total Coli forms 0 > 0
Color 0-5 > 15
Total Hardness 30-150 <30, >150
Total Iron 0-0,3 > 0,3
pH 7.0-8,5 6,5-7,0 8,5-9,0 6,0-6,5 <6 or >9
Sulfates < 500 > 500
Total Solids < 250 > 250
Turbidity 0-1 > 5
* Source: CGR, , “The State of the Natural Resources and the Environment”, Bogotá,
1995, p.69.
** For effluent the range varies between 0,1 and 1,5: effluent concentration is higher due
to residual chlorine must be enough throughout kilometers of pipes net.

CE-2 38
Limitations A and B Indexes varies from 1 to 5 and their result must be read as follows:
 Optimal Level : 5,0
 Acceptable Level: 3,0
 High Risk Level : 1,0
By not including indicators such as heavy metals, their presence may be
skipped. Nevertheless they are cost-effective for continual monitoring of
freshwaters bodies over deeper monitoring analyses already have been done.
They are also useful as a first approximation, and then, in agreement with the
results, to run exhaustive research upon other physic chemical and
bacteriological parameters, already mentioned..
Alternative
Indicators Index B
The B Index uses less indicators than the A and therefore it can be built in a
more cost effective way, as shown on Table A5.3 and Figure A5.2,
Parameters and Weight for Index B. From the Parameters used to built the A
Index, shown on Table A5.1, the alkalinity is skipped due to is in a close
relationship with the pH. Chlorine, Total Iron and Total Hardness are also
skipped because they relay upon color and turbidity, as well as Sulfates and
Total Solids. Lastly, The E-Coli is not included because if it is positive, the
water must be consider as not drinkable immediately.
TABLE A5.3. Parameters and Weight for Index B *
INDICATOR WEIGHT, %
Residual Chlorine 30
Total Coli forms 40
Color 5
pH 10
Turbidity 15
* Taken from CGR, “The State of the Natural Resources
and the Environment”, Bogotá, 1995, p. 70.

CE-2 39
Fig. A5.2 Parameters to build Index B
for Drinking Watyer Quality
30%
40%
5%
10%
15% Residual Chlorine
Total Coli forms
Color
pH
Turbidity
Importance The Indexes A and B allows to establish drinking water quality in a quick
and cost effective way. The weight in which each parameter influences the
overall Index value, is based upon an technical criteria. For instance, Total
coliforms and residual chlorine have a major importance over drinking water
quality, while the presence of E-Coli is a determinant criteria. The
qualification system is rude, assigning “0” (zero) to the parameters that are
over the value admitted by law as shown on Table A5.2.
On the other hand, these Indexes allows an integral way for measuring water
quality, quite useful to perform comparative studies and time series, without
using 12 or 5 indicators but one single Index instead. As an example, the
results for the Indexes A and B in the city of Bogotá for the year 1994 can be
seen on Table A5.4 in the following page.
Relationship
with other
indicators The A and B Indexes of drinking water quality have a direct relation with the
simple indicators or parameters used to their construction as shown on Table
A5.1 and A5.3. They also have an indirectly relation with the DBO5 (mg/l)
and DQO (mg/l) used to measure organic and inorganic pollution,
respectively, in a water body.

CE-2 40
TABLE A5.4. INDEX A AND B FOR BOGOTA, 1994*
INDICATOR
VALUE Score
(A5,2)
% A
(A5.1)
Weight % B
(A5.3)
Weight
Alkalinity 18 5 7,7 0,385
Residual Chlorine 0,5 5 13,8 0,690 30 1,5
Chlorine 3,8 5 3,1 0,155
E-Coli 0 5 23,0 1,150
Total Coli forms 0 5 16,9 0,845 40 2,0
Color 9 4 4,6 0,184 5
Total Hardness 27 0 3,1 0,000
Total Iron 0,2 5 3,1 0,155
pH 7,1 5 7,7 0,385 10 0,5
Sulfates 250 5 6,2 0,310
Total Solids 120 5 3,1 0,155
Turbidity 1,8 4 7,7 0,308 15 0,6
Index Result 4,7 4,6
* Source: CGR, , “The State of the Natural Resources and the Environment”, Bogotá,
1995, p.72.
Index A show a value of 4,7, Acceptable, while Index B shows a value of
4,6, Acceptable too.
Available
Information Indicators of the Public Services Companies. Public Services
Superintendence, Bogotá. Drinking Water Regulation Commission, Bogotá.
Urban and Regional Planning Unit at National Planning Department of
Colombia, Ministry of Development, Colombia.
Bibliography Drinking Water Norm 2105, Health Ministry, Bogotá, 1983.
EPA, quoted by CGR, , “The State of the Natural Resources and the
Environment”, Bogotá, 1995, p.69-72.
MMA, Drinking Water Quality Standard and Measurement, Bogotá, 1998.

CE-2 41
APPENDIX 6 - USING SIPSA

CE-2 45
APPENDIX 7. COURSES GIVEN IN ENVIRONMENTAL POSTGRADUATES
PROGRAMS OF SEVERAL UNIVERSITIES IN COLOMBIA

PLAN AND EVALUATE NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Similar to PLAN AND EVALUATE NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

Similar to PLAN AND EVALUATE NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (20)

More from Alvaro H. Pescador

More from Alvaro H. Pescador (20)

PLAN AND EVALUATE NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT